Conservative? Liberal? Progressive? In today’s language…the lines blur.
Is the opposite of a conservative really a liberal?
I’ve been reading a lot of history lately, and it makes me think about the way the lines have blurred in the “boxes” we must place people. For example, a politician may be labeled as a “Conservative Republican” or a “Liberal Democrat”. But what do these terms really mean? Most people consider “Conservative” to be synonymous with “the Right” and “Liberal” to be synonymous with “the Left”. The two are polar opposites.
My argument isn’t really about the nature of the term Conservative. For the most part, this label is being rightly used. My issue is more with the bastardization and hijacking of the term “liberal”.
What on earth do I mean? Well, let’s take a look at liberalism in its historic context, the liberalism that was a product of the Enlightenment.
In a historic sense, liberalism (or “classical liberalism”) is exactly what it sounds like, a belief in the importance of individual liberty. It is this premise upon which our founding fathers wrote, “all men are created equal” and have “inalienable rights; that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”. From liberalism came many of the individual rights that we enjoy, rights guaranteed under the constitution such as freedom of religion, association, the press, etc. In fact, the United States was the first, true liberal society and government! It is about individual freedom, not government intervention!
If you ask the following questions to someone labeled as a conservative, what do you think the response would be?
1. Do you believe in individual liberty and freedom?
2. Do you believe that government draws it legitimacy through the consent of the governed?
3. Should the government play a limited role in the life of each citizen?
4. Do you respond positively to the term “laissez-faire”?
The response would be a resounding YES on every count! Yet all of these are LIBERAL ideas?
Yet only a small fraction of Americans define themselves as liberal. How can this be when our entire society and government are based on liberal premises?
I’m not sure when the hijacking took place, but today, liberalism and progressivism are synonymous. Yet they are absolutely not! Perhaps it is because true progressives find the term, well, uncomfortable. They prefer instead to hide behind a few tenets of liberalism which happen to coincide with their own, giving them easier acceptance?
In fact, it is progressivism which is the opposite of conservatism. Yet we never hear talk of progressivism? Why is this, because most Americans would actually be opposed to it?
I’ve been reading a lot of history lately, and it makes me think about the way the lines have blurred in the “boxes” we must place people. For example, a politician may be labeled as a “Conservative Republican” or a “Liberal Democrat”. But what do these terms really mean? Most people consider “Conservative” to be synonymous with “the Right” and “Liberal” to be synonymous with “the Left”. The two are polar opposites.
My argument isn’t really about the nature of the term Conservative. For the most part, this label is being rightly used. My issue is more with the bastardization and hijacking of the term “liberal”.
What on earth do I mean? Well, let’s take a look at liberalism in its historic context, the liberalism that was a product of the Enlightenment.
In a historic sense, liberalism (or “classical liberalism”) is exactly what it sounds like, a belief in the importance of individual liberty. It is this premise upon which our founding fathers wrote, “all men are created equal” and have “inalienable rights; that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”. From liberalism came many of the individual rights that we enjoy, rights guaranteed under the constitution such as freedom of religion, association, the press, etc. In fact, the United States was the first, true liberal society and government! It is about individual freedom, not government intervention!
If you ask the following questions to someone labeled as a conservative, what do you think the response would be?
1. Do you believe in individual liberty and freedom?
2. Do you believe that government draws it legitimacy through the consent of the governed?
3. Should the government play a limited role in the life of each citizen?
4. Do you respond positively to the term “laissez-faire”?
The response would be a resounding YES on every count! Yet all of these are LIBERAL ideas?
Yet only a small fraction of Americans define themselves as liberal. How can this be when our entire society and government are based on liberal premises?
I’m not sure when the hijacking took place, but today, liberalism and progressivism are synonymous. Yet they are absolutely not! Perhaps it is because true progressives find the term, well, uncomfortable. They prefer instead to hide behind a few tenets of liberalism which happen to coincide with their own, giving them easier acceptance?
In fact, it is progressivism which is the opposite of conservatism. Yet we never hear talk of progressivism? Why is this, because most Americans would actually be opposed to it?
posted by Cogito at 9:40 AM
4 Comments:
"Liberal" and "conservative" are relative terms. A liberal is one who is open to (or perhaps vehemently pushing for) changes in society that relate to its heritage, ethics, and values. In the context of the late 18th century, a liberal was one who stood for individual liberty as opposed to the monarchical governments of Europe. To be a "conservative" back then was to be pro-monarchy, that is, to be devoted to the conservation of the inherited forms of life and government.
Now that individual liberty has become part of America's heritage and tradition, the conservatives are the ones who are defending it (that is, they are trying to "conserve" our heritage). Liberals are the ones who see that heritage as inherently unjust toward some group or other (take your pick: African Americans, women, Indians, the poor, etc.) and as a result they are trying to rectify the deficiencies of our national heritage by using government to return the wealth of this nation to its "rightful" owners.
You are correct that this is not really "liberal" in that it does not promote liberty. It is "liberal," however, in that it involves the liberal distribution of taxpayer dollars, which in turn requires the burden of heavy taxation.
I'm not so much concerned about the term "liberal" as I am about the term "progressive." It is hard to fathom a more snobbish word by which a movement could define itself.
Aaron,
But that's the rub. You define liberalism as "one who is open to changes in society". My argument is that that should NOT be the definition, though unfortunately it is the common understanding today. And true liberalism had to coin a new term, "classical liberalism", to differentiate itself from those who call themselves "liberals" today.
Our founding fathers were not "conservative" back then simply because governments at the time were illiberal. It wasn't that they were looking for change, per se, it's that they were looking for liberalism!
True Liberalism is founded on particular, coherent beliefs in individual rights. Period. This has nothing to do with "change" or "progress".
My point is this (as you pointed out as well). Conservatives today are more "liberal" than those defined as modern liberals. Modern liberals are really "progessives", people who are open to "changes in society" which they happen to call progress.
A true liberal would have rejected the "progress" made in the last 100 years(read FDR, LBJ, BHO) because this "progress" is antithetical to true liberal beliefs.
Yeah, I see what you're saying. "Liberalism" is a fixed idealogy, but in recent times it has morphed into a relative term.
"Conservative," on the other hand, is relative to whatever the heritage of a society happens to be. That's why you and I would be considered conservatives (at this point in time in America) who are advocates of liberalism.
Is that what you're getting at?
While we're at it, why don't we coin a new term and call ourselves "regressives"? ;)
Yep! That's my point.
Regressives...hmm....
Post a Comment
<< Home